This article was downloaded by:[Canadian Research Knowledge Network]

On: 10 July 2008

Access Details: [subscription number 783016864]
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Iranian Studies
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713427941
The Baha'is and the Constitutional Revolution: The
Case of Sari, Mazandaran, 1906-1913
Moojan Momen

Online Publication Date: 01 June 2008

To cite this Article: Momen, Moojan (2008) 'The Baha'is and the Constitutional
Revolution: The Case of Sari, Mazandaran, 1906-1913', Iranian Studies, 41:3, 343
— 363
To link to this article: DOI: 10.1080/00210860801981310
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00210860801981310

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article maybe used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction,
re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly
forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be
complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be
independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,
demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or
arising out of the use of this material.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 23:57 10 July 2008

Iranian Studies, volume 41, number 3, June 2008

Moojan Momen

The Baha’is and the Constitutional Revolution: The Case of Sari,

Mazandaran, 1906 –1913

Accounts of the Constitutional Revolution in Iran have tended to ignore the role of the Baha’is in
that event. This paper looks at the case of Sari, capital of Mazandaran province, where the
Baha’is of the city played a major part in initiating the move towards Constitutionalism and
in educating people about the reforms envisaged and about the modern world. They also led the
way in carrying out some of these reforms. In particular, the Baha’is established the first
modern schools in the town. In this process, they were opposed by the Muslim ‘ulama in the
town, who equated Constitutionalism and the Baha’i Faith, and persecuted the Baha’is of the
town relentlessly for both reasons, leading eventually to the killing of five of the leading Baha’is
of Sari in 1913. A brief account is also given of the attitude of the Baha’i leader ‘Abdu’l-
Baha (1844–1921) towards the Constitutional Movement and the role of the Baha’is in it.
This paper follows the events of the seven years 1906–13 in Sari and describes seven swings
of the pendulum of power in the town alternating between the Baha’is and Constitutionalists
on the one hand and the ‘ulama and the royalist forces supporting Muhammad ‘Ali Shah on
the other. It points out that the neglect of the Baha’i aspect of these events by historians has
led to a failure to account adequately for some of the events of these years.

The events of the Constitutional Revolution have now been extensively researched
and analyzed. The events of this period in the northern province of Mazandaran,
bordering the Caspian Sea, have also been chronicled, for example in the second
volume of Mahjuri’s Tarikh-i Mazandaran 1 and Shayan’s Tarikh-i Daw-hizar-sala-
yi Sari,2 and analyzed, for example in the last chapter of Kazembeyki, Society, Poli-
tics and Economics in Mazandaran, Iran, 1848–1914.3 It is the contention of this
paper, however, that previous authors have neglected the Baha’i dimension of
these events and without this dimension, a full understanding of this period is
not possible. Indeed, some facts such as the election of Hajji Shaykh al-Ra’is
(1264/1848–1918) who had no connections with Mazandaran as the delegate
for that province to the second Majlis (parliament) in 1909 remain inexplicable

Moojan Momen is based in Bedfordshire, England. (E-mail: momen@momen.org.uk)

1
Isma‘il Mahjuri, Ta-rı-kh-i Ma-zandara-n, vol. 2 (Sari, 1966), 230 – 283. The author was a resident of
Sari and had access to oral sources of information as well as archival ones.
2
‘Abbas Shayan, Ta-rı-kh-i Daw-hiza-r-sa-la-yi Sa-rı- (Qa’imshahr, 1993), 351 – 361, 366 – 378. This
source follows Mahjuri closely for this period, but often gives some additional details or expla-
nations.
3
Mohammad Ali Kazembeyki, Society, Politics and Economics in Ma-zandara-n, Iran, 1848 – 1914
(London, 2003), 159 – 210.
ISSN 0021-0862 print/ISSN 1475-4819 online/08/030343-21
#2008 The International Society for Iranian Studies
DOI 10.1080/00210860801981310
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 23:57 10 July 2008

344 Momen

unless one takes into account the Baha’i dimension. This paper will seek to unravel
some of these issues in relation to the town of Sari in particular.
During the movement for reform in Iran at the end of the nineteenth century
and the beginning of the twentieth century, one of the accusations hurled against
the reformers by their enemies was that they were “Babis”. As early as 1861, the
Faramushkhana set up by Mirza Malkam Khan was accused of being a rallying
point for the Babis.4 In the 1890s, we find that Sayyid Jamal al-Din Asadabadi
(“al-Afghani”) was considered by many to be a “Babi” and even to be the head
of the Babis.5 And throughout the period of the Constitutional Revolution we
find anti-Constitutionalists such as Shaykh Fad.lullah Nuri in his Lava-yih
(a series of printed pamphlets distributed throughout Tehran) accusing the refor-
mers of being Babis,6 while the troops besieging the Constitutionalists in
Tabriz in 1909 were urged on in their efforts by the assertion that they were per-
forming a religiously meritorious service by killing the “Babis” in that city (the
Baha’is were known as “Babis” by the general population of Iran at this time).7
Given that the “Babis” were considered enemies of Islam and rebels against the
Qajar regime, this was a serious accusation and one that was damaging to the
reformers personally and to the reform movement.
In general this accusation was false in that most of the reformers were not “Babis”
but there were two grounds on which the accusation was at least partly true.
First, although the figureheads of the Constitutional Movement such as Sayyid
‘Abdallah Bihbihani and Sayyid Muhammad Tabataba’i were strict Muslims,
many of those most active in agitating and manipulating affairs behind the
scenes were Azali Babis.8
Second, the Baha’i community in Iran were enacting an ambitious social
program including establishing modern schools, the advancement of the social
role of women and the election of local representative councils—all of which
were also part of the program of the Constitutionalists and reformers. The role
of the Baha’i community in the Constitutional Revolution has been little

4
Arthur Comte de Gobineau, Religions et philosophies dans l’Asie centrale (Paris, 1957), 273 – 274.
5
See for example the dispatch in May 1896 of Henry Longworth, the British Consul at
Trabizond, in Moojan Momen, The Ba-bi and Baha-’ı- Religions 1844 – 1944: Some Contemporary
Western Accounts (Oxford, 1981), 362 – 363 (see other examples of this, p. 362n.). Asadabadi was
in fact opposed to the Baha’is, probably because he perceived them as causing a division in the
Islamic world and also because of his close association with Azali Babis; see Baha’u’llah’s
comment on Asadabadi and his activities in Lawh-i Dunya, in Majmu-‘a-iy az Alwa-h.-i Jama-l-i
Aqdas-i Abha- kih ba‘d az Kita-b-i Aqdas na-zil shuda (Lagenhain, 1980), 54 – 55.
6
Mangol Bayat, Iran’s First Revolution: Shi‘ism and the Constitutional Revolution of 1905 –1909
(New York, 1991), 186 –187.
7
Albert Wratislaw, A Consul in the East (London, 1924), 246, cited in Momen, Babi and Baha’i
Religions, 368; see also Ibrahim Safa’i, Rahbara-n-i Mashru-ta, 2 vols., 2nd ed., Tehran, 1983)
-
1:393n; Ahmad Kasravi, Ta-rı-kh-i Mashru-ta-yi Ira-n, 4th ed. (Tehran, n.d.), 628, 681.
8
Bayat clearly demonstrates this throughout her book Iran’s First Revolution, although she does
cloud matters a little by frequently referring to these individuals by the designation “religious
dissidents” rather than Azalis. There were, however, no Azalis active in Sari.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 23:57 10 July 2008

The Baha’is and the Constitutional Revolution 345

studied as yet9 and there have been no studies of individual Baha’i communities.
The events in Sari, the capital of Mazandaran province, which are the subject of
this paper are interesting in that here we have a case where the accusation of the
Constitutionalists being “Babis” had a much more solid basis in that the leading
Constitutionalists in the city were Baha’is.

The Baha’i Community of Sari

The question of who was a Baha’i at this time and the range of Baha’i iden-
tities that existed is one on which a great deal could be said but in fact
little research has been done. This paper is, in one way, an empirical contri-
bution to this question but there is not the space to analyze this question
extensively here. Most Baha’is did not of course openly identify themselves
as such since that would have meant almost certain death. Suffice it to say
that the evidence for being a core member of the Baha’i community includes
such factors as being asserted to have been a Baha’i in histories written by
Baha’i and Muslim authors, membership of the Baha’i local elected council
(local spiritual assembly), having descendants who are Baha’is and who
assert that their ancestor was a Baha’i, and being in correspondence with or
visiting the Baha’i leader ‘Abdu’l-Baha (1844– 1921).
In contrast to the nearby town of Barfurush (now Babul), where there was a
strong Babi community, established by Mulla Muhammad ‘Ali ‘Quddus’ in the
1840s, which then went on to form the foundation of a Baha’i community,
there was no Babi community in Sari and the leading mujtahid of the city at
the time of the Bab, Mirza Muhammad Taqi Sarawi, was much opposed to the
new religion. The Baha’i community in Sari only gradually developed during
the last half of the nineteenth century. Probably the first Baha’i in the town
was Shaykh Hadi Afra-pulı- (d. 1316/1898), a cleric who had been a fellow
student of Mulla ‘Ali Jan Ma-hfuru-zakı- (executed 1883). When news of
Mahfuruzaki’s conversion to the Baha’i Faith spread to Sari in the 1870s, Afrapuli
volunteered to go to Mahfuruzak (a village 10 kilometres south-west of Sari)
and put his friend straight. This trip resulted instead in Afrapuli’s conversion.
Among other prominent early Baha’i citizens of the town were Ghulam-
Husayn Khan Shapur Muqtadir al-Sultan Kirmani, a government official;
9
Juan Cole has studied the role of Shaykh al-Ra’is (see later in this paper) and Janet Afary has
looked at the role of Tayira Khanum in The Iranian Constitutional Revolution, 1906 – 1911: Grassroots
Democracy, Social Democracy, and the Origins of Feminism (New York, 1996) 197-9. See also Moojan
Momen, “The Baha’is of Iran: the Constitutional Movement and the Creation of an ‘Enemy
Within’,” paper presented at the conference “The Iranian Constitutional Revolution 1906 –
1911”, held at University of Oxford, 30 July–2 August 2006, and Kavian Milani, “Baha’i Discourses
on the Constitutional Revolution,” in Baha’is of Iran: Socio-historical Studies, eds., Dominic Parviz
Brookshaw and Seena Fazel (London, 2008) pp. 141–155. The most detailed study of the Baha’is
-
in the period of the Constitutional Revolution is Mina Yazdani, Awd.a-‘-yi ijtima-‘ı--yi Ira-n dar ‘ahd-i
- - - - - - -
Qajar az khilal-i athar-i mubaraka-yi Baha’ı (Hamilton, Ont., 2003), esp. 255–316.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 23:57 10 July 2008

346 Momen

Karbala’i Yusuf Kirmani, a darvish who had the name Haqq-Mutlaq, and
Shahzada Hakim, a physician.10
When Mirza Ibrahim Nuri Saham al-Dawla arrived as deputy governor in Sari
in 1883 with orders from Kamran Mirza Na’ib al-Saltana, the governor, to clear
the province of Baha’is and in particular to arrest Mulla ‘Ali Jan Mahfuruzaki, he
asked Aqa Vali, the kalantar (mayor) of Sari, for a list of Baha’is. The latter gave
him a long list of Baha’is both in the town and in the surrounding area. One of the
government officials, Mirza Mahdi Ka-rparda-z, was, however, a covert Baha’i and
saw this list. He insisted that the kalantar had only made such a long list in order
to increase his own importance and that it was worthless. Eventually the gover-
nor tore up the list.11
During the last decades of the nineteenth century and the first decade of the
twentieth century, a number of prominent citizens of Sari became Baha’is. The
spread of the Baha’i faith was greatly assisted by the arrival in the town of
Mirza Hasan-i Va‘iz, a preacher from Qazvin. The latter used to quote occasion-
ally from passages of the writings of Baha’u’llah in his sermons and recitals of the
sufferings of the Imams. If anyone’s interest was sparked by this and they came up
afterwards and asked him about these passages, he would speak to them for a
while and if they seemed promising, he would start to tell them about the
Baha’i faith.12 Another person who played an important role in spreading the
Baha’i faith was Mirza ‘Inayatullah of ‘Aliyabad (later Shahi, now Qa’imshahr),
who occupied a senior position in the court of Muzaffar ud-Din Mirza at Tabriz.13
Among the prominent people of the area to become a Baha’i was Lutf-‘Ali
Khan Kulbadi (d. 1352/1933) who held the titles Salar Mukarram, Salar
Muhtasham, Muhtasham Nizam and Sardar Jalil (referred to henceforward as
Sardar Jalil although he only held this title towards the end of this period). He
belonged to the leading family of landowners and notables in Kulbad (or
Gulbad, now named Galugah), the most eastern district of Mazandaran, but
lived most of the time in Sari. After the death of his uncle Rida-Quli Khan,
Lutf-‘Ali Khan inherited his rank of Mir-Panjih (major general) and command
over the army in eastern Mazandaran. By the beginning of the twentieth century,
he was the wealthiest and most powerful figure in eastern Mazandaran as well as
the largest landowner.14 Lutf-‘Ali Khan became a Baha’i through Mirza ‘Inayatullah
‘Aliyabadi and prospered despite being quite open about his beliefs.
The following story is instructive in that it depicts the tightrope on which such
individuals walked as Baha’is and the strategies they employed to avoid trouble.
In about 1883, finding themselves powerless against Sardar Jalil, some of the local
-
10
Asadullah Fadil Mazandarani, Asra-r al-Atha-r, 5 vols. (Tehran, 1967 – 72), 4: 97 –98; idem,
Ta-rı-kh-i Z.uhu-r al-H
. aqq, vol. 8, pt. 1 (2 parts, Tehran, 1974 – 75), 818.
11
‘Azizullah Sulaymani, Masa-bı-h.-i Hida-yat, 9 vols. (Tehran, 1947 –76), 4: 516.
12
Asadullah Fadil Mazandarani, Ta-rı-kh-i Z.uhu-r al-H . aqq, vol. 6 (copy of mss. in private hands),
545 – 549; vol. 8, pt. 1: 615 – 618; Sulaymani, Masabih-i Hidayat, 2: 118 – 123.
13
Mazandarani, Zuhur al-Haqq, 6: 987 – 989.
14
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2: 268 –269; Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 101, 138 – 139.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 23:57 10 July 2008

The Baha’is and the Constitutional Revolution 347

‘ulama sent a complaint to Kamran Mirza Na’ib al-Saltana, the governor of

Mazandaran, that he was spreading the Baha’i faith and had assembled a group
of armed men ready to arise against the government. Sardar Jalil was summoned
to Tehran. “We hear you have established a religious circle (hawza) and the Shah
is very angry with you,” Na’ib al-Saltana said to him. Sardar Jalil, feigning ignor-
ance and stupidity and playing on the alternative meaning of the sound of the
word, replied, “I have only one pool (hawd.) in the new house that I have built
and if the Shah commands it, I will have it filled in.” Na’ib al-Saltana pressed
him with a few further questions but, in the end, laughed and allowed him to
return to his home with a cloak of honor.15 Sardar Jalil purchased some of
those villages in Mazandaran that had large numbers of Baha’is in them, such
as Ivil and Mahfuruzak, so that the Baha’is could live there without fear of har-
assment and persecution from their landlord, as happened elsewhere.
Another powerful figure of the area to become a Baha’i was Qasim Khan
Huzhabr Khaqan ‘Abd al-Maliki Zaghmarzi (later Huzhabr al-Dawla, by which
name he will be referred to in the rest of this paper), a chief of the ‘Abd al-
Maliki tribe and a military commander of its troops.16 He was described as “a
very dignified good-tempered young man. His mind is enlightened and he
always reads scholarly books and novels translated from the French.”17
There is less certainty about the Baha’i identity of a third figure, Mirza ‘Ali
Khan Salar Fatih (Sardar Fatih) Kujuri, a man who had risen from humble
origins to a position of power in Sari as the agent of Nasr al-Saltana Tunukabuni
(Sipahdar). According to one source, he was a Baha’i,18 but an elderly member of
the Sari Baha’i community does not remember him being mentioned as a Baha’i.19
It seems likely that he was a Baha’i or closely associated with the Baha’is in Sari in
the early stages of the Constitutional Revolution but that when he went to Tehran
in 1911, he ceased to associate with the Baha’is, since there is no record of his
being active as a Baha’i there.
It was largely because of the protection of such figures that the Baha’i faith was
able to spread rapidly in Sari in the decades preceding the Constitutional Revolu-
tion. Many individuals who were conscious of the need for social reform and
moral regeneration were attracted by its teachings. Among these was Sayyid
Husayn Muqaddas (1287/1870 –1343/1924), a member of a prominent local land-
owning family of sayyids, who was studying at a religious college when he was
converted to the Baha’i Faith by Mirza Hasan-i Va‘iz Qazvini. Word of
Muqaddas’s conversion spread and, when his father died, a cleric named Mirza
Muhammad ‘Ali Fa-d.il, wanted to take Muqaddas’s inheritance away from him.
15
Mazandarani, Zuhur al-Haqq, 6:988– 989; vol. 8, pt. 2: 808 – 9.
16
Ibid., vol. 8, pt. 2: 810, 818; Mazandarani, Asrar al-Athar, 4:98.
17
Mirza Siraj al-Din in Safarnama-yi Tuhaf-i Bukhara, quoted in Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 154;
a similar description is given in Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2:282
18
Shaqayiq Iqani, “Ta-rı-khcha-yi Mada-ris-i Baha-’ı- dar Ma-zandara-n,” unpublished paper, 2001,
22 – 23.
19
Telephone interview with Badi‘ullah Imani, 23 June 2006, confirmed by e-mail 29 June 2006.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 23:57 10 July 2008

348 Momen

Muqaddas went to Tehran and succeeded in having his rights confirmed there.
After this Muqaddas’s influence throughout the city increased. He had consider-
able land under cultivation and lived on a large plot of land on the outskirts of the
town.20 He converted his former fellow student, Mirza Muhammad Hamza-yi
Pishnamaz.
The Baha’i community in the town came to include prominent merchants such
as Mirza Muhammad Isma‘il Amin al-Tujjar Isfahani, Mirza Muhammad ‘Ali
Mushir al-Tujjar Tabrizi (who was a son-in-law of Mirza ‘Inayatullah ‘Aliyabadi)
and Hajji Muhsin Kashmiri. Also converted were Aqa Mahmud Sa‘atsaz (1280/
1863– 1912), who was engaged in journalism and had been a darugha (police chief)
in the town, and the bazaar trader Aqa Mirza Habib Kharazi-furush Isfahani.
There were also two physicians who became Baha’is, Aqa Lutf-‘Ali Khan Majd
al-Atibba’, who became a Baha’i in 1303/1885 and had extensive property in
Arata Bur Khayl, and Mirza ‘Ali Akbar Hafiz al-Sihha (d. c.1313/1895), who
was in charge of public health and also had property in Arata. The latter’s four
sons later took the surname of Dustdar and the eldest of them Ihsanullah Khan
(1884 – c.1944), studied at the Baha’i-run Tarbiyat School and then at the
St Louis School in Tehran and later taught French at the schools in Sari (hence
the reference to him as “Monsieur” Ihsanullah Khan in the list below).21 Majd
al-Atibba’s interest in reform is demonstrated by his membership of the
-
Mazandaran branch of the Ja-mi‘-yi Adamiyyat (established c.1903), an organiz-
ation that was inspired by Mirza Malkam Khan’s writings on reform and that
promoted the modernization of Iran.22
As part of their movement towards community development and social pro-
gress, the Baha’i community in Iran began to switch in the opening years of
the twentieth century from a more traditional system of community leadership,
by elders and former clerics, to elected councils, called local spiritual assemblies
(mahfil-i ruhani), to administer its affairs in each locality. In Sari, Sardar Jalil
was elected the chairman of this assembly and Sayyid Husayn Muqaddas its
secretary.23

The Constitutional Revolution in Sari

When the Constitutional Revolution first began to gather momentum in late

1906, the clerics of Sari led by Shaykh Ghulam ‘Ali Mujtahid, an opponent
of the Constitution, set up a political society (anjuman), called the Anjuman-i
20
Mazandarani, Zuhur al-Haqq, vol. 8, pt. 2: 809 – 812.
21
For details of these individuals see Mazandarani, Asrar, 4:97 – 98; Mazandarani, Zuhur al-Haqq,
vol. 8, pt. 1: 117 – 118; vol. 8, pt. 2: 801 – 808, 818; Star of the West 3/1 (21 March 1912) - Persian
section, 5; Muhammad ‘Ali Faizi, Hayat-i Hadrat-i ‘Abdu’l-Baha (Langenhain, 1986), 175 – 180;
‘Abdu’l-Husayn Avara (Ayati), al-Kawakib al-Durriya, 3 vols. in 2 (Cairo, 1923), 2: 166 – 167;
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2: 294n.
22
Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 283n131.
23
Iqani, “Tarikhcha-yi Madaris,” 23; Mazandarani, Zuhur al-Haqq, vol. 8, pt. 2: 808, 810.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 23:57 10 July 2008

The Baha’is and the Constitutional Revolution 349

Sa‘adat. Another cleric Shaykh ‘Ali Bihruzi was its secretary (mu‘avin) and it
was headquartered in a room adjoining the Imamzada Yahya shrine. A large
number of the members of the guilds (asnaf ) of the bazaar enrolled in this
anjuman and its numbers reached 1,000.24 However bickering and rivalries
emerged among the clerics of Sari and they were unable to agree on whom
to send as delegates to the national parliament. The city had always tradition-
ally been the seat of government in Mazandaran, but when it was unable to
decide on its delegates, the people of Barfurush were quick to set up the pro-
vincial council in their town and to elect deputies and send them to the Majlis
as the deputies for Mazandaran. Thus when the deputies from Sari eventually
arrived in Tehran in the summer of 1907, the Majlis rejected them.25 It appears
that the Anjuman-i Sa‘adat eventually dissolved as a result of these rivalries
and the bickering among the clerics of Sari.26
Not surprisingly there was a hostile reaction in Sari towards these proceed-
ings that had resulted in the humiliation of the town. Those in the city who
wanted to press forward with the reforms of the Constitutional Movement
and were suspicious of the reactionary tendencies of the ‘ulama formed an
anjuman called the Anjuman-i Haqiqat to oppose the Anjuman-i Sa‘adat. The
above-mentioned Sayyid Husayn Muqaddas was its founder and its main
members are listed as: “Mirza ‘Ali Khan Salar Fatih Kujuri, Monsieur Ihsanullah
Khan, Qasim Khan Huzhabr Khaqan ‘Abd al-Maliki Zaghmarzi, Abu’l-Qasim
Khan Sa‘id Hudur of ‘Aliyabad (Shahi [now Qa’imshahr]), Muhammad ‘Ali
Mushir al-Tujjar Tabrizi, Mirza Isma‘il Amin [al-Tujjar] Isfahani, Mirza
Habibullah Kharazi [-furush] Isfahani, Mahmud Sa‘atsaz, I‘timad al-Khaqan
Kasimi, Lutf-‘Ali Majd [al-Atibba’], Habibullah Sang, Habibullah Vaqifi,
‘Abdullah Fakhim Tihrani a qualified physician, Haji Mirza Mahmud Nili,
Mirza Hasan Salimi, Mirza Ahmad Aram and others.”27 This list is interesting
in that it demonstrates well the coming together in the Constitutionalist move-
ment of the socio-economic interests of certain groups: the mercantile and
trade classes (who were harmed by the corrupt and arbitrary nature of the
Qajar regime), the newly emerging modern professionals (teachers, physicians
and journalists who were beginning to create a middle class in Iran and who
needed a new socio-political order in which to do this), and individuals such as
Salar Fatih who had worked their way up from humble beginnings (and were
only too pleased to see the end of the ancien re´gime, which had oppressed them
and their families). Of greater interest to the subject of this paper however is
that of the seventeen persons named in this list as the founder and main
24
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2:230; Shayan, Tarikh-i Daw-hizar-sala, 351 – 352; Kazembeyki,
Society, Politics, 163.
25
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2:230; Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 163 – 164, 167.
26
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2:230; Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 163 – 164. See also
Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 145 – 148 regarding the rivalries among the ‘ulama.
27
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2:230; Shayan, Tarikh-i Daw-hizar-sala, 352 – 353; Kazembeyki,
Society, Politics, 163.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 23:57 10 July 2008

350 Momen

members of the anjuman, ten are known to have been Baha’is and the status of
the other seven is not known.28
Furthermore, we find that it is the first eight of the above list who are
mentioned repeatedly in the description of this seven year period (1906 –13) by
Mahjuri and who may therefore be regarded as the most active among the Con-
stitutionalists in Sari (the remaining nine are scarcely mentioned again). Of this
eight, seven were Baha’is.29 This would confirm the argument advanced else-
where30 that through a coming together of various factors (socio-economic inter-
ests and intellectual analyses of the problems of Iran), the same groups of people
who were active in pushing forward the Constitutionalist agenda were also
becoming Baha’is in large numbers at this time. No other pro-Constitutionalist
anjumans (societies) are named in Sari in this period.
The Anjuman-i Haqiqat under the leadership of Sayyid Husayn Muqaddas
made strenuous efforts to educate the people of Sari about democracy and the
nature of the reforms that were sweeping the country. This anjuman also estab-
lished social institutions to push forward its agenda. It was headquartered in
the Bagh-i Shah, which it developed as a park area in the town with flower
beds, lighting and benches, where both men and women would promenade (in
other words, it was modeled on the European park). In this park, there was a res-
taurant and a European-style café, where pro-constitutionalist newspapers could
be read and women were allowed to be customers. It also set up a screen in the
park so that films could be shown.31 The Baha’is in the anjuman put their effort
in particular into the opening of schools at which children could be educated
according to modern curricula (as distinct from the traditional maktab primary
school). This started with a boys’ school, opened in September 1906 in Bagh-i
Shah, by Sardar Jalil (who although not listed as a member of the anjuman was
a Baha’i and was, as will become clear, part of the pro-reform alliance in the
town) called the Salariyya School (at this time Sardar Jalil held the title Salar
Mukarram, hence the name of the school). He paid for all of the capital expenses
of the school and also gave 50 tumans per month so as to allow 40 poor pupils to
be among the 70 pupils (Baha’is and Muslims) admitted.32

28
The evidence for these nine individuals being Baha‘is has been given above; the information
for the remaining person, Mirza Hasan Salimi, was given in a telephone interview with Badi‘ullah
Imani, 23 June 2006, confirmed by e-mail 29 June 2006. The latter being 87 years old and a life-long
Baha’i of Sari knew most of these individuals as a child in Sari and was able to confirm the Baha’i
identity of the other individuals, except as indicated above. The seven whose status is not known are
Abu’l-Qasim Khan Sa‘id Hudur, I‘timad al-Khaqan Kasimi and the last six of the list, except Mirza
Hasan Salimi.
29
Only Sa‘id Hudur is not known to have been a Baha’i.
30
See Momen, “The Baha’is of Iran”.
31
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2:231– 232; Shayan, Tarikh-i Daw-hizar-sala, 355 –356;
Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 164.
32
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2:231– 233n, quoting the newspaper Majd al-Islam. Shayan,
Tarikh-i Daw-hizar-sala, 353; Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 158.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 23:57 10 July 2008

The Baha’is and the Constitutional Revolution 351

These developments, and in particular the setting up of the school, triggered

opposition in the town among the clerics, led by Shaykh Ghulam ‘Ali Mujtahid
and some Qajar princes (Sari is said to have contained many more clerics and
Qajar princes than other towns33). They declared all Constitutionalists in Sari
to be infidel Babis and Baha’is and the Constitution itself to be a work of kufr
(impiety). They opposed the restaurant, cinema and school.34 As a result, the
Anjuman-i Haqiqat took on an increasingly anti-clerical tone.35
As Kazembeyki has shown, far from the governor being the supreme auth-
ority in the province, “by the time of the Constitutional Revolution (1905),
the local clergy had become the local powers in the urban areas of Mazandaran,
while military commanders and tribal chiefs were local powers in rural areas.”36
Thus another aspect of this conflict between the anti-constitutionalist clerical
class in Sari and pro-Constitutionalist Baha’i landowners and tribal leaders
such as Sardar Jalil and Huzhabr al-Dawla may have been rivalry over
whether it should be the urban or rural local powers that predominated in
that part of Mazandaran. In the early stages of the Constitutional Revolution,
some, at least, of the Muslim landowners sided with the Constitutionalists
and Baha’is (Habibullah Khan Surtij Hizarjaribi Ashja‘ al-Mulk assisted
the re-establishment of the Baha’i-run school after its destruction at the hands
of a mob in 1908, see below, by allowing the use of the buildings of a
madrasa of which he was the trustee37), but later, as will be demonstrated,
most (including Ashja‘ al-Mulk) decided that their class interests lay with the
anti-Constitutionalists. Ismail Khan Bavand Savadku’i Amir Mu’ayyad,
another large landowner, had a long-standing rivalry with Sardar Jalil and
opposed the Constitution throughout.38
Thus was begun a struggle that was to continue for seven years (1906 – 13)
between the progressive and reformist elements in the town (led by Sayyid
Husayn Muqaddas, Sardar Jalil and the Baha’is) and the anti-Constitutionalist
elements (led by Shaykh Ghulam ‘Ali and the ‘ulama, some Qajar princes and
some landowners and military leaders such as Amir Mu’ayyad). During these
seven years, there were to be seven swings of power first to one side and then
to the other, beginning with the first swing towards the Constitutionalists and
Baha’is in 1906 with the victory of the Constitutionalist movement nationally
and the granting of the Constitution.

33
Salar Fatih quoted in Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2:232; Shayan, Tarikh-i Daw-hizar-sala,
355. See also comment by Zill al-Sultan that the town contained more than 200 Qajar princes in
the 1860s (Tarikh-i Mas‘udi, cited in Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 233n130) and by Mirza Siraj
al-Din that there were many mullas in the town (Safarnama-yi Tuhaf-i Bukhara, quoted in Kazembeyki,
Society, Politics, 144).
34
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2:232–233 (quoting Salar Fatih); Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 171.
35
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2:230; Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 164.
36
Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 148.
37
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2:232n; Shayan, Tarikh-i Daw-hizar-sala, 354.
38
Shayan, Tarikh-i Daw-hizar-sala, 354 – 355.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 23:57 10 July 2008

352 Momen

Hardly had the victory of the Constitutionalists been gained, however, than
a reaction set in. Within less than a year of the opening of the Salariyya
School, it closed down. According to a Baha’i source, this was because of
the opposition of the anti-Constitutionalist elements in the town and the fact
that the founder of the school was a Baha’i.39 Mahjuri states, however, that
the closure was because Sardar Jalil declined to continue to support the
school financially.40 Support for the Baha’i account comes from an independent
source that confirms that in the propaganda against the school, Sardar Jalil was
accused of being a Baha’i.41 It may be that such intense pressure was brought
to bear on Sardar Jalil that he considered it prudent to allow the school to
close. The students of the school then appealed to the Anjuman-i Haqiqat
and so Sayyid Husayn Muqaddas set up a new school, called the Haqiqat
School in 1907 in another building in the Bagh-i Shah, defraying any
budget shortfall of the school personally.42
Another symptom of this struggle between the two sides in Sari was the com-
petition between the Constitutionalist Baha’i Huzhabr al-Dawla and his anti-
Constitutionalist uncle ‘Askar Khan ‘Iza-m al-Mulk for control of the ‘Abd
al-Maliki tribe and its military detachment (the ‘Abd al-Malikis were a tribe
originally from southwest Iran who were resettled in the village of Zaghmarz,
northeast of Sari, in 1858, in order to protect the borders of Iran from Turkoman
raiders and so their detachment of 500 cavalry was an important part of the
Mazandaran armed forces).43

The Baha’i Position on Political Involvement

The Baha’i leader ‘Abdu’l-Baha had supported modernization and reform in

Iran since the 1870s when he wrote a book, Risala-yi Madaniyya, in which he
urged democracy well before most secular Iranian reformers were calling for
it. The Baha’is themselves had led the way with many of the social reforms
being advocated by the Constitutionalists. In the opening years of the twen-
tieth century, the Baha’is switched from a system of traditional leadership by
notables and former clerics to elected councils in each local Baha’i commu-
nity (the first elected council in Tehran was established in 1315/1897, but
most were established in the first decade of the twentieth century). They
had instituted modern schools and had advanced the social role of women
39
Iqani, “Tarikhcha-yi Madaris,” 23.
40
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2:232n; Shayan, Tarikh-i Daw-hizar-sala, 353 – 354.
41
Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 171, citing Fortescue, Military Report and Sadr al-Ashraf, Khatirat.
42
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2:232n; Shayan, Tarikh-i Daw-hizar-sala, 353 – 354.
43
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2:282; Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 180, 187, 188 – 189; on the
- -
‘Abd al-Malikis, see Iraj Afshar Sistani, Il-ha- Cha-dur-nishı-n va Tawa-yif-i ‘Asha-yirı--yi Ira-n, 2 vols.
(Tehran, 1368/1987), 2:1078 – 1079 and Ludwig Adamec, Historical Gazetteer of Iran, vol.
1:Tehran and Northwestern Iran (Graz, 1976), 5 – 6.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 23:57 10 July 2008

The Baha’is and the Constitutional Revolution 353

in their communities.44 Although ‘Abdu’l-Baha had instructed the Baha’is not

to take part in open defiance of the government (and they did not participate
in the street demonstrations and the taking of sanctuary in the British Lega-
tion in Tehran in the summer of 190645), they did broadly support the Con-
stitutionalist cause.46 Thus, as noted above, in Sari, the Baha’is led in setting
up the Anjuman-i Haqiqat to support the reforms.
During the whole of 1906, when the nation had been united in its demands for
change, ‘Abdu’l-Baha was supportive of this movement. After the Constitution
had been granted and the Majlis (Parliament) established however, and with
the accession to the throne of Muhammad ‘Ali Shah and his opposition to the
Constitution, the national consensus began to fracture and factionalism set in.
In about February 1907, ‘Abdu’l-Baha was becoming worried about the direction
that the political process was taking and issued instructions that the Baha’is
should refrain from taking part in the process. His reasons for this are discussed
elsewhere.47 It is not known when this instruction reached Sari but it certainly
posed a problem for the Sari Baha’is. They were so closely identified with the
Constitutionalist movement that they could not easily separate themselves from
this in the eyes of the general public. Indeed, so closely was the Constitutionalist
movement identified with the Baha’i faith that the very fact that they continued to
be Baha’is was sufficient grounds for the public to identify them as Constitution-
alists. The majority of the Baha’is took the course of ceasing political activity but
continuing with elements of the reform process such as support for modern
schools. Some of the Baha’is such as Sardar Jalil and Huzhabr al-Dawla,
however, continued to play an active social and political role in the events that

44
On Baha’i-run schools, see Moojan Momen, “The Baha-’ı- Schools in Iran” in Brookshaw and
Fazel, Baha’is of Iran, pp. 94 – 121. On women, see Moojan Momen, “The Role of Women in the
Iranian Baha’i Community during the Qajar Period” in Religion and Society in Qajar Iran, ed.
Robert M. Gleave (London, 2005), 346 – 369 and Dominic Parviz Brookshaw, “Instructive encour-
agement: tablets of Baha’u’llah and ‘Abdu’l-Baha to Baha’i women in Iran and India” in Brookshaw
and Fazel, Baha’is of Iran, pp. 49 – 93.
45
This is what ‘Abdu’l-Baha states (Makatib-i ‘Abdu’l-Baha, vol. 4 (Tehran, 1964), 179) and there
is no record of any Baha’i participating, even Shaykh al-Ra’is who was the most politically active
(Safa’i, Rahbaran-i Mashruta, 1: 582).
46
There were a few Baha’is who, because they were members of the Qajar family or landowners,
opposed the Constitution but there is no evidence that these were more than a handful and none of
them were in Sari. The only notable Baha’i supporter of the royalist cause was the Qajar prince
Muhammad Husayn Mirza Mu’ayyad al-Saltana (later Mu’ayyad al-Dawla), who became head of
the royal cabinet under Muhammad ‘Ali Shah; Mazandarani, Zuhur al-Haqq, 8/2: 832; Sulaymani,
Masabih Hidayat, 2: 266 –71. Another Baha’i Mahdi Khan Vazir Humayun (Qa’im-Maqam) Ghaffari
is reported at first to have opposed the Constitution (Avara, al-Kawakib al-Durriya, 2: 181) but this
seems to have been before he became a Baha’i. Other Baha’is such as the brothers ‘Azizullah and
Valiyullah Varqa were closely associated with Muhammad ‘Ali Shah’s court but they had positioned
themselves there on ‘Abdu’l-Baha’s instructions so that they could act as intermediaries for ‘Abdu’l-
Baha’s communications with the Shah. This matter however requires further research. The situ-
ation in Shiraz (in the south), for example, was complex.
47
Moojan Momen, “The Baha’is of Iran.”
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 23:57 10 July 2008

354 Momen

unfolded. It is not clear whether they were deliberately disobeying ‘Abdu’l-Baha,

whether they had not learned of ` Abdu’l-Baha’s instructions48 or whether they
were, by virtue of their prominent position and their command of military
forces, merely unable to extricate themselves from the political process.
Similarly, a few of the Baha’is seem to have continued to play a part in the
Baha’i community but also to have continued some limited political involve-
ment. Aqa Mahmud Sa‘atsaz and Mirza Habibullah Kharazifurush, for
example, are described as Baha’is and also as having been members of the
Democrat Party after 1909.49 At least one Baha’i, however, Ihsanullah
Khan (Dustdar), separated himself from the Baha’i community and threw
himself actively into the political process. He moved at first to Tehran
where he was politically active after 1909 among the more extreme elements
of the reform movement (Kumitih-yi Mujazat which had goals and activities
that were radically opposed to Baha’i principles) and then he moved to Gilan
province where he became a leading figure in the Jangali Revolt, 1918 – 21.50
No Baha’is in Sari are recorded as being opposed to the Constitutional
Movement.

The Minor Autocracy in Sari

As opposition to the Constitution grew throughout the country orchestrated

by Muhammad ‘Ali Shah and Shaykh Fad.lullah Nuri in Tehran, the anti-
Constitutionalist ‘ulama of Sari, led by Shaykh Ghulam ‘Ali Mujtahid, Shaykh
Muhammad ‘Ali Sultan al-Dhakirin and Shaykh Muhammad, formed a new
anjuman in May 1908, the Anjuman-i Islamiyya, specifically to oppose the
Anjuman-i Haqiqat. They declared the members of their anjuman to be the only
true Muslims and everyone else to be either “irreligious, Babi, Baha’i or infidel
(kafir)”.51 All of the major clerics in Sari were against the Constitution.
48
Avara maintains that the Sari Baha’is had not been informed of ‘Abdu’l-Baha’s prohibition of
involvement in politics, but he admits that his information is incomplete (Avara, al-Kawakib al-
Durriya 2: 166 – 167). Avara’s statement seems to be contradicted by Mazandarani’s assertion that
Mushir al-Tujjar was not involved in political activity by 1911 (Zuhur al-Haqq, 8/2: 803).
49
Mazandarani, Zuhur al-Haqq, 8/2: 805 – 806, 813. Mazandarani in fact contradicts himself
calling Aqa Mahmud first an ardent Baha’i (Baha-’ı--yi mushta‘il, Zuhur al-Haqq, 8/2: 805 – 806) and
later when he records his becoming a member of the Democratic Party, he calls him merely a sym-
pathizer (muhibb) with the Baha’i faith (Zuhur al-Haqq, 8/2: 813).
50
No satisfactory biography of Ihsanullah Khan Dustdar has been written, but see Mahjuri,
Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2:294n. and Kavus Rustamnizhad, “Khula-sih-yi Zindigı--na-mih-yi Ihsa-nulla-h
Kha-n Du-stda-r,” Ga-h Ru-za-nih-ha--yi Dı-ru-z va Imru-z, 3 (Spring 1377/1999): 37–44, viewed at http://
rouzaneha.org/GahRouzaneh/151-200/153_Ehsanolah.pdf on 25 January 2007. On the Jangali
revolt, see Cosroe Chaqueri, The Soviet Socialist Republic of Iran, 1920–21: Birth of the Trauma
(Pittsburgh, 1995); for Dustdar’s involvement, see the index in this book under “Doustda-r”; for
Dustdar’s continuing Baha’i sympathies, see 512n68.
51
Shayan, Tarikh-i Daw-hizar-sala, 355 – 356; Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2: 232 –233;
Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 171 – 172.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 23:57 10 July 2008

The Baha’is and the Constitutional Revolution 355

Among the minor clerics, however, the above-mentioned Shaykh ‘Ali Bihruzi
was in fact the son of Shaykh Hadi Afrapuli, the first Baha’i of Sari and, during
these events, Bihruzi himself became a Baha’i, left the clergy and became a teacher
in the Baha’i-run schools in Sari;52 Sayyid Mirza ‘Ali ‘Imadi Pahna-Kala’i (d.1929)
was another cleric who supported the Constitution and later became a member of
parliament and an important cleric—he was not however one of the major clerics
in Sari at this time.
With Muhammad ‘Ali Shah’s coup in June 1908 and the dispersal of the Majlis
(the beginning of the period called the Minor Autocracy, Istibdad-i Saghir), the
pendulum swung toward the anti-Constitutionalist elements throughout Iran.
The anti-Constitutionalist and anti-Baha’i cleric, Shaykh Fad.lullah Nuri from
his residence in Tehran, intensified his activities, directing the ‘ulama of Mazan-
daran to issue fatwas against the Constitution and the Baha’is.53 In Sari, those
who were opposed to the Baha’is and to the Constitution, such as Shaykh
Ghulam ‘Ali, were encouraged and redoubled their efforts. All those who sup-
ported the Constitution were harried and accused of being “Babis,”54 while pro-
minent Baha’is who had been strong supporters of the Constitution such as Salar
Fatih were forced to leave the city and go into hiding.55 Sardar Jalil was even
arrested briefly in early 1909 when he went to Tehran.56 The anti-Constitutionalist
head of the ‘Abd al-Maliki tribe, ‘Askar Khan, gained the upper hand against the
pro-Constitutionalist Baha’i Huzhabr al-Dawlih.57
The major victim of this resurgence of anti-Constitutional forces was the
Baha’i-run Haqiqat School. A mob of 1,000 instigated by the Anjuman Islamiyya,
descended upon the school, expelled the pupils and destroyed the furniture,
forcing the school’s closure.58 It was probably also at this time that the garden
and residence of Sayyid Husayn Muqaddas was looted twice by a mob who con-
sidered the “Sayyid-i Babi” a supporter of the Constitution.59

The Reestablishment of the Constitution

The third swing of the pendulum in Sari occurred with the success of the Constitu-
tionalist forces in taking Tehran and deposing Muhammad ‘Ali Shah in July 1909.
The balance of power in Sari was restored in favor of the Constitutionalists and
the Baha’i notables such as Sardar Jalil and Huzhabr al-Dawla. The latter was
52
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2: 232n.; Shayan, Tarikh-i Daw-hizar-sala, 354.
53
Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 170, 175; Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2: 239.
54
Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 174.
55
Ibid., 174 – 175. He then joined Sipahdar Tunukabuni in the march on Tehran to overthrow
Muhammad ‘Ali Shah.
56
Haj Aqa Muhammad ‘Alaqaband Yazdi, “Tarikh-i Mashrutiyyat,” Iranian National Baha’i
Archives, photocopy series (manuscript in Afnan Library), vol. 2, 231 – 232.
57
Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 176.
58
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2: 232n; Shayan, Tarikh-i Daw-hizar-sala, 354;
59
Mazandarani, Zuhur al-Haqq, 8/2: 811.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 23:57 10 July 2008

356 Momen

appointed chief of the ‘Abd al-Maliki tribe and its military force in place of his anti-
Constitutionalist uncle ‘Izam al-Mulk.60 The Haqiqat School was reopened (Sayyid
Mirza ‘Ali ‘Imadi, see above, assisted in this).61 By the beginning of 1911, power
throughout much of Mazandaran lay in the hands of Baha’is and Baha’i sympathizers,
with Sipahdar Tunukabuni in the west of the province and Sardar Jalil and Huzhabr
al-Dawla in the east, being the most influential power-brokers in the province.62
It is in the context of this Baha’i domination of the province that we can under-
stand what would otherwise seem an inexplicable episode—the election of Hajji
Abu’l-Hasan Mirza Shaykh al-Ra’is (1264/1848– 1918) as the member of parlia-
ment for Mazandaran to the second Majlis, which was established after the fall
of Muhammad ‘Ali Shah. We have seen above that there was rivalry between
Barfurush and Sari for political pre-eminence and Barfurush had won initially
in having its delegates represent Mazandaran in the first Majlis. Thus when the
second Majlis was established in 1909, the people of Sari were determined not
to be left behind and immediately set up the provincial council in their town. Bar-
furush objected but Tehran eventually decided in favor of Sari and two delegates
from Mazandaran were elected to go to the second Majlis.63
One of the two delegates elected from Sari to represent Mazandaran at the
Majlis was Shaykh al-Ra’is, a pro-Constitutionalist Qajar prince who had been
born in Tabriz, raised in Mashhad and was a resident of Tehran; in other
words a prince who had no substantial connections with Mazandaran. This puz-
zling nomination only becomes understandable when one realizes that Shaykh al-
Ra’is was a Baha’i. It appears he had been raised as a Baha’i by his mother, who
was a secret convert. Although he had trained as a Shi‘i cleric, later he reverted to
his Baha’i upbringing. Shaykh al-Ra’is visited ‘Abdu’l-Baha twice and had on
several occasions been expelled from towns such as Mashhad and Shiraz for
being a Baha’i. He was active in the reform movement from the 1890s onwards
and had evidently chosen to ignore ‘Abdu’l-Baha’s instructions to abstain from
political involvement.64 The choice of a person such as Shaykh al-Ra’is with

60
Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 187.
61
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2: 232n; Shayan, Tarikh-i Daw-hizar-sala, 354; Kazembeyki,
Society, Politics,182, 294n185.
62
Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 187; on the evidence for Tunukabuni being a covert Baha’i, see
Momen, “The Baha’is of Iran.”
63
Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 182 – 184.
64
For Baha’i-authored biographies of Shaykh ur-Ra’is see Sulaymani, Masabih-i Hidayat, 7:
419 – 447, Muhammad Afnan, “Abu’l-Hasan Mirza Shaykh al-Ra’is,” ‘Andalı-b 16, no. 63 (Summer
1997): 39–46, 52. See also Juan Cole, “Autobiography and Silence: The Early Career of Shaykh
al-Ra’ı-s Qa-ja-r”, in Iran im 19.Jahrhundert und die Entstehung der Baha-’ı- Religion, eds. Cristoph Bürgel
and Isabel Schayani (Hildesheim, 1998), 91–126; Juan Cole, “The Provincial Politics of Heresy
and Reform in Qajar Iran: Shaykh al-Rais in Shiraz, 1895–1902,” Comparative Studies of South Asia,
Africa and the Middle East 22, nos. 1&2 (2002): 119–129. The only historian to try to give an expla-
nation of why Shaykh al-Ra’is was appointed is Mahjuri (Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2: 275n.) who points
out that Shaykh al-Ra’is’ brother was stationed in Sari as postmaster. But this brother was an
anti-Constitutionalist and as an outsider had little influence in the town.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 23:57 10 July 2008

The Baha’is and the Constitutional Revolution 357

no Mazandaran connections as the delegate for Sari to the provincial council, held
in Sari, and subsequently as the provincial council’s delegate to the national par-
liament, can only have been because of his Baha’i connections and the influence of
such persons as Sardar Jalil, Huzhabr al-Dawla and Sayyid Husayn Muqaddas.

The Return of the Deposed Shah

The restoration of the Constitution in 1909 was not, however, to be the last swing
of the pendulum of power in Sari. In July 1911, the deposed shah, Muhammad
‘Ali Mirza, arrived in Astarabad (now Gorgan) in the northern province of the
same name with covert Russian support in an attempt to regain his throne.
Immediately, most of the notables, landowners and tribal leaders of Mazandaran,
including ‘Izam al-Mulk, Ashja‘ al-Mulk and Amir Mu’ayyad, rallied to Muhammad
‘Ali Mirza. Shaykh Ghulam ‘Ali Mujtahid and most of the other clerics of Sari also
rallied to the deposed shah’s support. Ashja‘ al-Mulk was appointed by Muhammad
‘Ali Mirza to be governor of Mazandaran and ‘Izam al-Mulk commander of the
army. Among the four or five notables who refused to support Muhammad ‘Ali
Mirza and had their property looted were the three Baha’i notables, Huzhabr
al-Dawla and Sardar Jalil, who fled to Tunukabun along the Caspian coast, and
Salar Fatih who was in Tehran.65
All of the important Constitutionalists and reformers in Mazandaran similarly
fled or went into hiding. The other prominent Baha’is of Sari did not go into
hiding however because most of them had left off political activity four years pre-
viously at ‘Abdu’l-Baha’s instruction therefore they did not feel that they were in
danger66—a decision that was to have tragic consequences. The Baha’i-run
Haqiqat School in Sari was closed. On 8 August 1911, Muhammad ‘Ali Mirza
entered Sari.
During the late summer of 1911, the former shah’s forces were defeated on
several occasions and Barfurush and Sari were recaptured by the nationalist gov-
ernment forces under Salar Fatih. Shaykh Ghulam ‘Ali Mujtahid, the leading anti-
Constitutionalist cleric, and Habibullah Mirza, the anti-Constitutionalist brother
of Shaykh al-Ra’is, were both executed on 12 September 1911.67 But on 30
October, the nationalist forces suffered a severe setback outside Astarabad and
Muhammad ‘Ali Mirza regained control of much of Mazandaran. The govern-
ment was in crisis, being in a showdown with the Russian government over
Morgan Shuster, the American financial controller brought in by Iran to stabilize
the government finances, and so was slow to react to this set-back. Order in the
cities of Mazandaran deteriorated and control of these towns fell into the hands of
65
Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 174 – 175, 188 – 189; Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 277; Shayan,
Tarikh-i Daw-hizar-sala, 366 – 367.
66
See for example the comment about Mushir al-Tujjar in Mazandarani, Zuhur al-Haqq, 8/2: 803.
67
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2: 274, 276n; Shayan, Tarikh-i Daw-hizar-sala, 367 – 371;
Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 190.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 23:57 10 July 2008

358 Momen

ruffians and gang-leaders who gave nominal support to Muhammad ‘Ali Mirza
but in fact used the opportunity to loot and despoil everyone.68
The local clerics who were opposed to the Baha’is urged Muhammad ‘Ali
Mirza to take action against the supporters of the Constitution in Mazandaran.
They showed a photograph to the former shah of those whom they asserted
were supporters of the Constitution in Sari. This was probably either a group
photograph of the Baha’is of Sari or more likely an early photograph of the
Anjuman-i Haqiqat, with its majority of Baha’i members. Muhammad ‘Ali
Mirza sent ‘Ali Qalı-ch, who was a wrestler and a thug from the Caucasus, to
Sari to join forces with a gang leader named Muhammad Hajj ‘Abbas, charged
with crushing all support for the Constitution in Sari. Qalı-ch brought with
him arms and put a large number of the ruffians and criminal element in Sari
into Caucasian uniform (the implication of this being that people would
assume them to be under Russian protection). These gang-leaders and ruffians
joined forces with the anti-Constitutionalist, anti-Baha’i clerics of Sari.69
On the night of 2 January 1912, a mob took to the streets of Sari to finish off all
support for the Constitution. All of the main supporters of the Constitution had
already fled and so, with the encouragement of the local clerics, it was the Baha’is
who were identified as the targets for the mob. Na’ib Husayn Sham‘saz showed
the mob the way to the house of one Baha’i Aqa Mahmud Sa‘atsaz with whom
Na’ib Husayn had a longstanding feud. The wall of his house was scaled, his
door opened and the mob looted his house. They dragged him to a ruined
bath-house where they tortured him and then strangled him with a rope, after-
wards throwing his body into a pit. They looted his house and during the
course of this, according to one account, they beat his daughter, Sakina, so
much that she also died. Then they attacked the house in which another Baha’i
Mirza Muhammad Isma‘il Amin al-Tujjar Isfahani was lodging. Aqa Sayyid
Zaman, who owned the house, came out to protest and they attacked him.
Seeing that the latter was in mortal danger, Amin al-Tujjar emerged from the
house. He was taken away, tortured and then shot dead.
The next Baha’i to die that night in Sari was Mirza Muhammad ‘Ali Mushir al-
Tujjar Tabrizi who was the son of Mulla Muhammad Kitabfurush who was from
Ma‘muri near Nishapur and had moved to Tabriz. Mushir al-Tujjar lived with his
wife Bahiyya Khanum, the daughter of Mirza ‘Inayatullah ‘Aliyabadi, and their
three children as well as his wife’s mother, sister and nephew. On this night of
2 January 1912, the wall of his house was scaled and the mob ransacked and
looted the house until the occupants had nothing left but the night clothes
they were standing in. Mushir al-Tujjar himself was beaten severely and
dragged off to the garden of Mirza ‘Askari Sadr al-‘Ulama. There he was shot

68
Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 188 – 191.
69
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2: 277; Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 191 – 192; Mazandarani,
Zuhur al-Haqq, 8/2: 813; Shayan, Tarikh-i Daw-hizar-sala, 374.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 23:57 10 July 2008

The Baha’is and the Constitutional Revolution 359

dead and his body thrown into the town moat, where it remained until late the
next day since no-one dared to risk the wrath of the mob by retrieving it.
Either on the same day or a few days later, Hajji Muhsin Kashmiri, who was
living in the Hajj Shaykh ‘Ali Caravanserai was dragged out of his room and
shot to death. Another Baha’i, Aqa Mirza Habib Kharazi-furush Isfahani, who
had fled the town but been captured in Qadi-Kala by Karbala’i Muslim
Huzhabr-i Divan and returned, was handed over to ‘Ali Qalich who used him
as target practice for his men, aiming first at the legs and then the abdomen
and finally killing him.70
Other Baha‘is such as Aqa Lutf-‘Ali Majd al-Atibba’ succeeded in remaining
hidden, while Hafiz al-Sihha was at one point surrounded by a mob and would
have been killed if he had not been rescued by a local notable.71 There were
thus five Baha’is killed in Sari at this time (six if Sakina the daughter of Aqa
Mahmud be included); at least four of these had been leading members of the
Anjuman-i Haqiqat; Kashmiri’s membership of Anjuman-i Haqiqat is uncertain
but he had certainly been a prominent Constitutionalist.72 Two prominent
Baha’is were killed in the nearby villages of Mahfuruzak and Bur-khayl by the
same mob a few days later.73 The following week on 12 January 1912 in
Barfurush, the house of another Baha’i, Mir Muhammad ‘Ali Mu‘in al-Tujjar,
one of the most important merchants of Barfurush, who had, like the Baha’is
killed in Sari, been one of the leading pro-Constitutionalist activists, was attacked
at night and both he and his wife were killed.74
Muhammad ‘Ali, the deposed shah, was finally defeated shortly after this in
March 1912, although it was a further month before the government managed
to reassert its authority in Mazandaran. This was the fifth swing of the pendulum,
this time towards the Constitutionalists and Baha’is. The Baha’i notables Sardar
Jalil and Huzhabr al-Dawlih were able to return to Sari and regain their positions
of influence and power. Sayyid Husayn Muqaddas now set up a new school on his
own property called the Ta’ı-d School. A Yazd Baha’i, Shaykh Zayn al-‘Abidin
Abrari who was teaching at the Baha’i-run school in Barfurush, was brought in

70
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2: 277 – 279; Mazandarani, Zuhur al-Haqq, 8/1: 117 –118, 8/2:
801 – 806, 814; Star of the West 3/1 (21 March 1912 ) - Persian section, 5; Faizi, Hayat-i Hadrat-i
‘Abdu’l-Baha, 175 –180; Avara, al-Kawakib al-Durriya, 2: 166 – 167; Shayan, Tarikh-i Daw-hizar-
sala, 375 – 376; Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 191 –192. See comments by ‘Abdu’l-Baha concerning
the involvement of the partisans of Muhammad ‘Ali Shah in these killings in Maka-tı-b-i ‘Abdul-
Baha-, vol. 5 (Tehran, 1975), 176; and in ‘Abd al-Hamid Ishraq-Khavari, Ma-’ida-yi Asama-nı-, 9
vols. (Tehran, 1964 – 72) 5: 176, 198 – 199. Only Mahjuri mentions the killing of Sakina. There is
some disagreement in the sources as to whether the murder of Kashmiri took place on this
night, a few days later or a month earlier.
71
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2: 279; Mazandarani, Zuhur al-Haqq, 8/2: 814.
72
Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 184.
73
Mazandarani, Zuhur al-Haqq, 8/2: 806 – 808; Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2: 278.
74
Mazandarani, Zuhur al-Haqq, 8/2: 808; Star of the West 3/1 (21 March 1912) - Persian section, 5;
Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 192; Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2: 255, 258; the latter source
describes him as one of the two leading Constitutionalists of Barfurush (2: 255).
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 23:57 10 July 2008

360 Momen

as headmaster and most, but not all, of the teachers, were Baha’is. It had the six
primary classes and the pupils were a mixture of Baha’is and Muslims. A girls’
school was established in parallel with the boys’ school and Nayyira Abrari,
the wife of Zayn al-‘Abidin, ran that school.75

The Campaign of Salar al-Dawla

There was again a further set-back for the government and the Constitutionalists
when Prince Salar al-Dawla, a brother of the former shah, landed in Astarabad in
November 1912 under Russian protection and his forces occupied Sari in May
1913, despite resistance led by Ihsanullah Khan Dustdar. Sardar Jalil was
forced to seek Russian protection, which must have been irksome to one who
had supported the Constitutionalists throughout. The Baha’i Ta’id School was
closed. Salar al-Dawla’s forces were, however, defeated a month later and he
retired to Baku. The government was then able to restore its authority through-
out Mazandaran.76
This then was the seventh and last swing of the pendulum in this seven-year
period with the result that the Constitutionalists and Baha’is emerged once
more. Sardar Jalil was able to restore his prestige and come out of Russian pro-
tection (he confirmed this by openly opposing the Russians over an inheritance
dispute shortly afterwards77). At about this time, in July 1913, there was a
further clash between the two factions of the ‘Abd al-Maliki tribe and the reac-
tionary ‘Izam al-Mulk was killed in this clash, resulting in the triumph of
Huzhabr al-Dawla, although he had to withdraw to Tehran until 1915 because
of Russian anger at the death of his uncle whom they had supported.78
The Baha’i community returned to some degree of security and prosperity. It is
not clear when exactly the Baha’i Ta’id School was re-opened but it was probably
immediately after the defeat of Salar al-Dawla and certainly before 1919. Sardar
Jalil and Sayyid Husayn Muqaddas again put their efforts into building up the
school and Shaykh Zayn al-‘Abidin Abrari was again the headmaster.79
In the years after 1913, there was continuing opposition to the Baha’is from the
‘ulama of Sari but the protection of Sardar Jalil and Huzhabr al-Dawla minimized
the impact of this. Thus for example the clerics of Sari arranged one year that,
during the ‘Ashura commemorations of the martyrdom of Imam Husayn, as
the mourners went around the streets of the town in procession beating them-
selves with clubs, they should attack the houses of the Baha’is. The Baha’is
came out onto the streets of their quarter to defend themselves and Sardar Jalil
75
Iqani, “Tarikhcha-yi Madaris,” 23 – 25, 32.
76
Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 195 – 196; Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2: 280; Shayan, Tarikh-i
Daw-hizar-sala, 374 – 375.
77
Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 83.
78
Mahjuri, Tarikh-i Mazandaran, 2: 282 –283; Kazembeyki, Society, Politics, 197.
79
For more on the Baha’i-run schools, see Iqani, “Ta-rı-khcha-yi Mada-ris”.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 23:57 10 July 2008

The Baha’is and the Constitutional Revolution 361

sent his cavalry into the town and the threatened attack was averted.80 When
‘Alaviyya Khanum, the leading Baha’i of Mahfuruzak,81 died in 1921 and the
enemies of the Baha’is were making it difficult to carry out the funeral, Sardar
Jalil arrived and used his influence to enable the funeral to take place. When
‘Abdu’l-Baha died in 1921, Sardar Jalil held three days of mourning ceremonies
for him which many of the notables of Mazandaran attended and at which the
above-mentioned Sayyid Mirza ‘Ali ‘Imadi, who was a cleric and a member of
parliament, gave a moving address.82

Conclusion

This paper has focused on a small part of the overall picture of what was
happening during the Constitutional Revolution in order to demonstrate
the consequences of neglecting the Baha’i dimension. The events in Sari
during the period 1906 to 1913 have been recorded and analyzed in the
accounts of this period by historians, such as Isma‘il Mahjuri and Mohammad
Ali Kazembeyki, but unless these accounts are connected up with the Baha’i
accounts of that period, the analyses of this period are defective. Thus, for
example, when most of the landowners and tribal leaders in Mazandaran
sided with the royalist and anti-constitutionalist forces, the fact that Sardar
Jalil, Huzhabr al-Dawla and Salar Fatih came out on the side of the Consti-
tutionalists can be far more easily explained by their adherence to the Baha’i
faith than any other explanation. Similarly, the election of Hajji Shaykh al-
Ra’is as the delegate for Mazandaran would be inexplicable without under-
standing the Baha’i dimension. By being blind to this Baha’i dimension,
the accounts of Sari during this period by Iranian and Western scholars
are incomplete.
It should also be noted that this blindness is not one way. Indeed as Peter Smith
has commented “While most studies of modern Iranian history and society con-
sistently marginalize the importance of the Babis and Baha’is . . ., Baha’i historians
have a tendency to confine themselves to rather inward-looking and contextless
biographical studies.”83 The Baha’i historians cited in this paper, even Fadil
Mazandarani whose work is impressive by the standards of the 1940s when he
was writing it, have equally neglected in their accounts the social and political
dimension of the Baha’i community of Sari during the Constitutional Revolution.
80
Mazandarani, Zuhur al-Haqq, 8/1: 435.
81
On ‘Alaviyya Khanum, see Momen, “Role of Women,” 356 –357.
82
Mazandarani, Zuhur al-Haqq, 6: 989, 8/2: 817 – 818. On ‘Imadi, see ‘Abbas Shayan, Mazandaran:
Sharh-i Hal-i Rijal-i Mu‘asir (Tehran, 1938), 53
83
Review of Religion and Society in Qajar Iran, ed. Robert Gleave, in Baha’i Studies Review 13 (2005),
133. A similar double blindness is noted by Houri Berberian with respect to Armenians and Iranians
in “Traversing Boundaries and Selves: Iranian-Armenian Identities during the Iranian Consti-
tutional Revolution,” Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East 25, no. 2
(2005): 279.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 23:57 10 July 2008

362 Momen

This tendency is not of course confined to accounts of Mazandaran; most

Iranian historians have almost completely neglected the Baha’i community of
Iran in their analyses of nineteenth and twentieth century Iran, except when
there is an opportunity to attack the Baha’is, while some Iranian writers have
even used scholarship as a cover for anti-Baha’i polemic.84 As a consequence of
this neglect in the Persian sources, Western scholars have also tended to ignore
the Baha’i community in their works.85 This neglect has serious consequences
for scholarship,86 especially when dealing with the period of the Constitutional
Revolution when the Baha’i community was at the forefront of introducing
ideas and was setting the pace in social reforms, such as the introduction of par-
ticipatory democracy, the setting up of modern schools, and the advancement of
the social role of women. Baha’i ideas were influencing society, at least that
element of society that was interested in reform and progress, and unless one is
alert to this, the picture that one obtains is distorted or incomplete.
Another interesting factor that this study has demonstrated is the wide range of
degrees of involvement of the Sari Baha’is in the Constitutional Movement (par-
ticularly after ‘Abdu’l-Baha’s prohibition on involvement became known) and
consequently the existence of a range of differing Baha’i identities.
84
Prior to the Islamic Revolution, the main purveyors of anti-Baha’i polemic posing as scholarship
-
were such individuals as Khan-Malik Sasani (Dast-i Panha-n-i Siya-sat-i Ingilı-s dar Ira-n, Tehran, 1952) and
--
Isma‘il Ra’in (H . uquq-bigıran-i Ingilıs dar Iran, Tehran, 1967 and Inshi‘ab-i Baha’iyyat pas az marg-i Shawqı-
- - - - - -
Rabba-nı-, Tehran, 1978). After the Revolution, some writers have continued this line, among them
- -
‘Abdullah Shahbazi (see his “Justa-r-ha-’ı- az Ta-rı-kh-i Baha-‘ı--garı- dar Ira-n,” Ta-rı-kh-i Mu‘a-sir Ira-n 7,
no. 27 (2003): 7–52). The matter of anti-Baha’i propaganda in Iran in the twentieth century is begin-
ning to be investigated; see Rida Afshari, “Naqd-i h.uqu-q-i bashar-i Baha-’iya-n dar Jumhu-rı--yi Isla-mı-”,
Irannama 19, nos. 1–2 (2001): 151–164, translated as “The discourse and practice of human rights vio-
lations of Iranian Baha’is in the Islamic Republic of Iran,” in Brookshaw and Fazel, The Baha’is of Iran,
-
pp. 232–77; Mohammad Tavakoli-Targhi, “Baha-’ı--sitı-zı- va Isla-m-gara-’ı- dar Ira-n,” Iran-Nama, ibid.:
79–124, translated as “Anti-Baha’ism and Islamism in Iran” in Brookshaw and Fazel, Baha’is of Iran,
pp. 184–99; H.E. Chehabi, “Anatomy of Prejudice: Reflections on Secular Anti-Baha’ism in Iran” in
Brookshaw and Fazel, Baha’is of Iran, pp. 200–31.
85
A good example of this is Frances Bostock and Geoffrey Jones, Planning and Power in Iran:
Ebtehaj and Economic Development under the Shah (London, 1989). In the opening chapter, the
authors attempt to answer the question: “Where did Ebtehaj get the ideas and outlook which dif-
ferentiated him so starkly from most of his Iranian contemporaries?” (p. 11). Their conclusion is
that one of the most important influences on Abu’l-Hasan Ibtihaj’s “views and character” was
the moral uprightness and independence of mind of his father Mirza Ibrahim Ibtihaj al-Mulk
(p. 11). And yet, nowhere in this opening chapter (pp. 11 – 24) where this matter is discussed
(nor indeed anywhere else in the book) is it mentioned that Ibtihaj al-Mulk was an active and com-
mitted Baha’i. Indeed during a persecution of the Baha’is that broke out in Rasht in 1903, he had
been temporarily expelled from the town as one of the leading and well-known Baha’is (see dispatch
of the British consul Churchill, 19 May 1903, FO 248 792, in Momen, Babi and Baha’i Religions, 376).
Nor is it mentioned that Abu’l-Hasan Ibtihaj himself had been brought up as a Baha’i and had
attended the Baha’i-run Tarbiyat School in Tehran, although he was not a Baha’i in his adult years.
86
See discussion of this point in Ismael Velasco, “Academic Irrelevance or Disciplinary Blind-
Spot? Middle Eastern Studies and the Baha-’ı- Faith Today,” MESA Bulletin 35, no. 2 (Winter
2001), 188 – 200. Available at http://fp.arizona.edu/mesassoc/Bulletin/35-2/35-2Velasco.htm
(viewed 26 January 2007).
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 23:57 10 July 2008

The Baha’is and the Constitutional Revolution 363

There has thus far not been any studies of the role of individual Baha’i
communities in the Constitutional Revolution and so it is impossible to know
whether the events recorded in this paper are typical of the rest of Iran or not.
Perhaps the fact that none of the town’s major clerics supported the Consti-
tutional Revolution created a special situation which enabled the Baha’is to par-
ticipate in a way that they were prevented from doing elsewhere. The brief
mention made above to the murder of Mu‘in al-Tujjar in Barfurush (where
there were pro-Constitutionalists among the major clerics) hints, in any case, at
the possibility that what happened in Sari was not atypical. Indeed, the accepted
view that the clerical class were the leading lights of the Constitutional Movement
is itself in need of reassessment.87
This paper opens up many questions regarding the nature and range of Baha’i
identities, the debate that was going on within the Baha’i community, the public
perception of the Baha’i community, the contribution made by Baha’i teachings
to the public discussion of reform, and the alliances made between the Baha’is and
other pro-Constitutionalist groups. These are all subjects for further research.

87
In many small towns, such as Astarabad, Zanjan, Arak (Sultanabad) and Sari, the leading
clerics were against the Constitution, and in the larger towns, such as Tehran and Tabriz, there
was usually a faction of the cleric class who were opposed. Thus the orthodoxy that the clerical
class were the leaders of the Constitutional Revolution, first established by E.G. Browne (in The
Persian Revolution of 1905 –1909, Cambridge, 1910) and subsequently confirmed by Hamid Algar
(in Religion and State in Iran 1795 – 1906, Berkeley, 1969) has hidden the role of other groups and
needs to be re-examined on a town-by-town basis. Bayat (Iran’s First Revolution), Afary (The
Iranian Constitutional Revolution) and others have already studied other leading groups in the Consti-
tutional Revolution. I am grateful to Peter Smith and Sen McGlinn for their comments on this
paper.